| XBK Chat (unofficial archive) A meeting place for past members of Brahma Kumaris
FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups
Profile You have no new messages Log out
When did we stop questioning? Goto page Previous 1, 2
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author | Message
--- | ---
the prisoner Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 23 |
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 9:02 am Post subject: |
ex-london wrote :
Quote:
Hitler was not a vegetarian
I wish it weren't true, but the evidence suggests otherwise : http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/ http://www.brokennewz.com/displaystory.asp_Q_storyid_E_747hitlerbeef http://www.fallacyfiles.org/archive022004.html http://www.all-creatures.org/mfz/myths-hitler-do.html _________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:26 pm Post subject: |
the prisoner wrote:
ex-london wrote :
Quote:
Hitler was not a vegetarian
I wish it weren't true, but the evidence suggests otherwise : http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/ http://www.brokennewz.com/displaystory.asp_Q_storyid_E_747hitlerbeef http://www.fallacyfiles.org/archive022004.html http://www.all-creatures.org/mfz/myths-hitler-do.html
It is not. And, FFS, websites do not count as " evidence ". Even one of those websites states the very same things, that Hitler continued to eat meat and use the listed animal extracts above. OK, let's play the " if it says it on a website it must be true game ... " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_of_Adolf_Hitler as a starter. What would you call someone that called themselves a vegetarian but still eat meat and sausages when they felt it and took bull's bollock injections? There are many words, not all printable here but vegetarian is not one of them. Look at the tosh in those pages ; " When other people say that Hitler was a vegetarian, they use the word in its ordinary meaning, that is, a person who generally—as a rule of thumb—avoids meat ". That is bollocks. And I am sorry but no, the " ordinary " meaning of Vegetarian is one defined by not eating meat and using meat products. Fullstop. Go look up a dictionary or ask the Vegetarian Society. Who has ever heard of a "high redefinition" of "vegetarianism" being required to define vegetarian and vegetarian? Besides, Hitler had his good side just like anyone else. And even being predominantly vegetarian was a good thing. I rather liked the picture of him feeding Bambi. You just ought to be glad that he did not become a Straight Edge vegan ... otherwise he probably would have worn the war outright in the first few months.
the prisoner Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 23 |
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 5:41 pm Post subject: |
What is very obvious about this subject is that the Vegetarian Society and allied bodies are very eager to airbrush Adolf out of the vegetarian family photograph! Notwithstanding the logical fallacy underlying their concerns. Perhaps the most interesting question to ask is what separates Adolf (with his sophisticated lifestyle choices, his original and sometimes progressive views and his love of high culture) from you and me? In another time and place, would he have been good BK recruitment material? What is the essential difference? (Without citing Drama, Fate, Destiny, Providence which would be to beg the question). _________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:09 pm Post subject: |
Quote:
What is the essential difference? (Without citing Drama, Fate, Destiny, Providence which would be to beg the question
Errm..could it be loveable old Adolf was just a tad more relaxed regarding the pros and cons of genocide than yer bog standard xbk?
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:41 pm Post subject: |
Quote:
What arrogance to think oneself more "pure" than a wise and loving person, who happens to eat oysters.
To some degree I think Joel has a point here. Since I've given up the 'couldn't possibly eat anything prepared by shudras line. Non veggie friends and family have been bending over backwards to prepare highly palatable veggie nosh without a fishbone in sight. Infact the only culinary discomfort I've experienced recently has been when dining with fellow xbk's who've decided to go back on the meat and are clearly perturbed with my continued no u-turn policy on vegetarianism. Gyan has allowed me to acknowledge that folk who have strong roots in historically meat eating cultures, will find themselves in conflict with their cultural egregore in considering vegetarianism, despite the overwhelming arguments for it's rapid adoption in the seasonless global food market that at least we in the west have recently begun to enjoy.
the prisoner Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 23 |
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:28 pm Post subject: |
Wee Jamesy wrote :
Quote:
Errm..could it be loveable old Adolf was just a tad more relaxed regarding the pros and cons of genocide than yer bog standard xbk?
OK, but what makes a fanatic? Adolf thought he was acting for the greater good of humanity - genocide or no genocide. Could there be a streak of hard-core fanaticism in the BK world? I've met more than one Holocaust Denier in there. _________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:29 am Post subject: |
Quote:
‘Could there be a streak of hard-core fanaticism in the BK world? I've met more than one Holocaust Denier in there.
Nothing would surprise me Prisoner old chum. But pointing out some unsavoury outlook that some who consider themselves bks seem to hold, appears to be a favourite method of turning many a forum thread into yet another cult bashing exercise. To me, judging the value of a philosophy on the basis of the alleged behaviour of some of its adherents is a weak argument. Surely you will come to a much more balanced conclusion by studying the source? e.g. the Vegetarian aspect ..certainly a cause of considerable stress, confusion and pious interpretation as it is practised by many bks. But from my own murli study, I have found a reasonable well-balanced guide to the benefits of vegetarian satvic diet and of food preparation/consumption in a peaceful atmosphere. To me it is not presented in the hard and fast way that some choose to interpret it. The murli intimates that when you find yourself in situations when it is not practical to eat this way, don’t get too hung up about it. Even going as far as to advise that those who through work (military personnel etc), routinely have no access to cooking facilities, should just make the most of their circumstances. My interpretation is that as a lifestyle choice the benefits are clearly advocated, and if there is reference to adopting a hardened piety about it, then I must be choosing to miss it, on the contrary flexibility seems to be what’s advised. And when you couple that with other aspects of the gyan, such as the supposed expansion of humanity into colder parts of the world without access to modern technology, where the adoption of meat eating to survive the winters would seem reasonable. Then I think it is a good philosophical template to allow the practise of vegetarian diet in relaxed co-existence within a pre-dominantly meat eating society.
wahl Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Posts: 187 Location: Essex, England |
Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 5:29 am Post subject: |
Quote:
the supposed expansion of humanity into colder parts of the world without access to modern technology,
I must have missed something...............is this a BK idea? Please could you bring me up to speed on this one Jamesy. _________________ om shanti wahl
the prisoner Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 23 |
Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 7:29 pm Post subject: |
Wahl wrote :
Quote:
I must have missed something...............is this a BK idea
I think Jamesy is referring to a common scientific idea that in a cold climate like Russia or northern Europe, it is not possible or very difficult to survive by growing your own vegetables - especially if you only use primitive farming techniques. Because this is the cultutral/historical experience in Western countries implies that a fairly tolerant attitude to meat eaters is advised. Not really a BK idea. Jamesy wrote :
Quote:
pointing out some unsavoury outlook that some who consider themselves bks seem to hold, appears to be a favourite method of turning many a forum thread into yet another cult bashing exercise
I wasn't intending to cult-bash, simply to begin some speculation on why some individuals become fanatics and others don't. What is in their psychological make-up? This is an interesting subject, n'est-ce pas? (By the way, I don't think there are many fanatics in the BK world)
Quote:
judging the value of a philosophy on the basis of the alleged behaviour of some of its adherents is a weak argument
Well, it is valid to look at trends. The fact that Tibetan Buddhists have not reacted with campaigns of violence to the rape of their country allows us to draw valid conclusions about their philosophy. _________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 12:50 pm Post subject: |
Quote:
I must have missed something...............is this a BK idea? Please could you bring me up to speed on this one Jamesy.
Pleasure Wahl….. The deities restrict their living space to Bharat, as in Golden age no other large landmasses exist, -other than the odd picnic spot where the U.S and UK are currently positioned. All well documented in the murli. Then there is a fall from grace, and what happens next is described in rather less detail. Essentially there is a profound loss of lore, both spiritual and technological, and whereas in the deity world there is one land, one kingdom, one culture etc, post deityism there are many lands, kingdoms etc. From what I recall there’s very little actually in the murli on the mechanics of how all this happens, but the most common b.k interpretation is that adventurous types, realising that Bharat’s not quite what it was, head off to virgin shores to start afresh. Although ‘start afresh’ timescales are never detailed, looking back on documented history it must all have happened in quite a rush, so my point was that nation builders maybe be forgiven, if rather than waiting on the first harvest, they turned carnivorous…and of course once a habit’s started…
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 1:04 pm Post subject: |
Prisoner wrote:
Quote:
Well, it is valid to look at trends. The fact that Tibetan Buddhists have not reacted with campaigns of violence to the rape of their country allows us to draw valid conclusions about their philosophy.
Couldn’t agree more and dare I say, yet another positive trend indicator for vegetarianism. But in the same vein, I feel it’s just a tad less than honest to suggest that Hitler was a typical vegetarian, or that BKs who deny the holocaust are typical of the organisation.
Quote:
I wasn't intending to cult-bash, simply to begin some speculation on why some individuals become fanatics and others don't. What is in their psychological make-up? This is an interesting subject, n'est-ce pas?
Psychological makeup? – dunno, think they may come in every shade. But you’re right, this is interesting. There’s a subtle but obvious divide between those who pursue their faith with zeal and enthusiasm and those who are over zealous. I guess one definition would be that the former are sustained by the lifestyle offered by their chosen philosophy, whereas the zealots struggle with it, often in a love/hate relationship. After my fairly brief BK honeymoon period finished, the temptations of the world soon returned. At first I would just covertly dip my toe on occasion. No harm done I secretly thought. But once a habit forms that you know is deceptive in terms of self progress, loss of self regard starts to take hold, so that each time you realise it's high time to return to the ‘path’, it has by necessity become straighter and narrower than before.
the prisoner Joined: 18 Aug 2004 Posts: 23 |
Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:27 am Post subject: |
Quote from Jamesie :
Quote:
it’s just a tad less than honest to suggest that Hitler was a typical vegetarian¨
According to the following survey, up to 10% of the population call themselves vegetarian, but only 2.8% never eat meat, fish or eggs. http://www.vrg.org/journal/vj2003issue3/vj2003issue3poll.htm This indeed makes Hitler a "typical vegetarian".
Quote:
.....or that BKs who deny the holocaust are typical of the organisation
Who said that?
Quote:
those who pursue their faith with zeal and enthusiasm ........are sustained by the lifestyle offered by their chosen philosophy, whereas the zealots struggle with it
So the fanatics are the ex-BK's! _________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:54 pm Post subject: |
jamesy wrote:
Quote:
What is the essential difference? (Without citing Drama, Fate, Destiny, Providence which would be to beg the question
Errm..could it be loveable old Adolf was just a tad more relaxed regarding the pros and cons of genocide than yer bog standard xbk?
LOL! ... whilst the B.K. sit there willing the world - and 6 Billion - into total destruction and nuclear annihilation. May be you guys are right and it is something in the soya beans that does it ... Come on guys, there is a big difference being calling one's self something and actually being it. Who wants to admit themselve's a wannabe failure? Is a pacifist that beats his wife a pacifist? What he is, is someone with problems. Is a vegetarian that eats non-vegetarian food a vegetarian? Then nothing is everything and everything nothing. This most interesting thing I learnt from this whole " Hitler was a Wannabe Vegetarian " thread is that there is a philosophical or semantic method of debate known as " reductio ad Hitlerum ". Closely related to " reductio ad absurdum ", i.e. association fallacy. This is the use of the fallacy " Hitler did something therefore it is bad " being effective trick in debate due to the near-instant condemnation of anything to do with Hitler or the Nazis. Mind you, it did not stop Volkswagen being the favored hippy mobile of all time. Now, let's all admit it ... we love you Hitler for your Beetle, Autobahns and admit that the Zionists were never so hot on growing trees either ... Anyone remember talk going about the B.K.s that Hitler was Christ come to pay back the Jews their karma? Note, not an official point of view I know.
ex-london Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 131 |
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:02 pm Post subject: Modern myth and financial exploitation |
the prisoner wrote:
Well, it is valid to look at trends. The fact that Tibetan Buddhists have not reacted with campaigns of violence to the rape of their country allows us to draw valid conclusions about their philosophy.
Its a minor point but I would have to pull you on this statement. Frankly, that is a naive lie - not on your behalf but one that you have swallowed hook line and stinker. Putting aside the full political and contradictory nature of the many Tibetan factions, and a historical context as near ago as the 1940s more akin to Medieval Italy, the Dalia Lama's brother was financed to the sum of many million Dollars by the CIA to wage an armed rebellion against the Chinese. Many commentors will go into print to say that this continued into the 1990s with minor "terrorist" bombings by Tibetan rebels. I have always wondered that if the Dalia Lama brother had not been involved, would the Chinese - who were fully aware of the American's involvement and why the Americans were involved - not have kicked ass as heavily as they did. Put yourself in the Chinese's tai chi slippers. Some guy that runs a one school of monastry with their own, albeit ineffectual home guard, has a brother that is being financied by your enemies who is shooting, bombing and killing you. Are they in it together? What do you do? Aks them to stop nicely and if they dont, just whack the other brother and his mates. Its just another flavour of age old gang warfare. There has been a whole heap of " Tibetwash " that tells a big lie inconvenient to New Age - and Yellow Hat - marketing people. There was a culture of violence in Tibet. They were not very good at it and heavily outnumbered. I have not actually read these articles in full but I just offer it as the first substantial link Google throws up ; Cold War in Shangrila http://www.naatanet.org/shadowcircus/shang8.html History of the Dalai Lamas http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
Quote:
" In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, and breaking off hands. There were instruments for slicing off kneecaps and heels, or hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. " Oh, that was just for use by the Lamas against the Tibet not the Chinese.
And, yes, ditto the Holocaust. For sure we are not taught the whole story there either. " The six million " is just the Holy Cow of the Zionist regime that has been milked endlessly for all it is financially worth. A mythic figure that had been floating around since WWI. Norman Finkelstein's The Holocaust Industry would be your safest starting point ; http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/ He is Jewish and left-wing and his folks really did suffer. It is all myth and largely financial exploitation. In some cases, like the B.K.s and Yellow hats perhaps, both financial and psychic exploitation. For the record, the " Six Million " that I think we ought to be concerned about are the children that died this and will die next year out of avoidable hunger. A holocaust that we can change and not a fixation on a past that we will never know the truth of, that we are being manipulated with and even if we did know the truth of - will never be able to change.
jamesy Joined: 09 Oct 2005 Posts: 19 |
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:12 pm Post subject: |
ex-london wrote:
Quote:
LOL! ... whilst the B.K. sit there willing the world - and 6 Billion - into total destruction and nuclear annihilation. May be you guys are right and it is something in the soya beans that does it ...
Sorry Ex-L, but that's both unfair and misrepresentative. While it may possibly apply to the large number of followers who ultimately struggle to make any sort of recognisable headway on the path. A fairer observation is that the small nucleus of practitioners, who have actually managed to effectively and consistently apply the tenets of BK RY in their lives, are motivated by love rather than fear. Although I find that I can no longer accept the bk claim that the Golden-aged coronation is 30 years away, I still broadly share the view that 'civilisation' as we know it is on borrowed time. And even though I am now without the support of the BK community, I still have no difficulty in preferring to apply the maxim of 'change yourself through soul conciousness and change your environment' to that of the gloating cynic. Even If I have long since conceded that my efforts may not yield the success that I might have once hoped for, it is for me still a much more decent response, to acknowledging what I think is becoming more inevitable by the day, not just to 'doomsday cults' but increasingly the wider population.
Display posts from previous:
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions | All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group